Quote:The quick & silly answer would be, "because they are in the syllabus". LOLBut seriously, our step sparring, 1, 2 & 3 are part of pre-arranged sparring. Pre-arranged in the sense, the format, number of attacks are pre-arranged. When this series has been introduced to the student, they move to semi-free sparring at 5th gup green belt. When they reach 4th gup blue belt, they start to learn free sparring. So it is a careful progression based on several uses, or purposes, which is the focus of your question. So here is the exact answer as to the purpose of our step sparring:3 step: to teach DISTANCE2 step: to acquire a MIX of hand & foot techniques1 step: to SIMULATE real combatNow what you describe seems to be a SD technique drill. However it also seems that it may not be the most effective SD training, as you describe an intitial attack for real, but then seem to indicate that is the only attack & the attacker then just "strikes a pose". In addition, you further describe that it appears the defender is allowed to use more than 1 counter attack against someone who is no longer an opponent, but a partner who is only posing. This IMHO may also help to create a false sense of security & actually be detremental from a SD standpoint.

Quote:What you describe as 3 step and 2 step are similar to what is taught at our white belt levels so they understand as you explained

No I don't think they are described as the same. I said 3 steps teach distance. Do you emphasize distance & if so how do you measure it or insure it is done correctly? Do your 10th gups white belts do 3 step sparring alone? If they do it with a partner, then it can not be what we do. Does the attacker in 2 steps attack with a hand & foot attack?

Quote: and then at yellow belt free sparring is introduced and they do not have to wait till blue belt, which to me puts them a head in the game and by blue belt have an even greater understanding of sparring, distance, timing, understanding how to take a hit, etc.

It has been my experience that the sooner someone free spars, the more they tend to limit themselves & build bad habits. The focus of our syllabus is to develop good BBs, not good yellow or blue belt fighters. BB is just the start for us.

Quote:Our one-steps are learned at each belt level so that they are worked on thoroughly and understood, however the more trained you are the better you will also understand this at higher belt levels. I see this no different then you explanation of your one-steps.

Of course there is a big difference. First, it is introduced at green belt 4th gup level. Most importantly there is only 1 counter attack allowed. If not, the realism is lost, as your opponent will not stand in a pose for you to continue hitting them.

Quote:To say they are not good training techniques for self defense.......Are you narrow minded enough not to see their usefulness; much better then "any" pattern which I find to be a waste as there is no resistance. Also narrow minded to think that is the only means of self defense taught; it is one in many taught with most against resisting opponents.

That Sir is not what I wrote. Please see above. I described it as what appeared to be a "SD drill", in terms of helping a student learn counter combos. I only said it "may not be the most effective SD training". The false sense of security is linked to the fact the defender has the option to use mutiple counter attacks & the attacker doesn't. This to me does not seem realistic, as any attacker in the street will of course continue hitting, they will not pose. IMHO limiting to 1 counter attack helps solve this conflict. Nothing more, nothing less. I realize that 1 steps are only 1 part of yours & many schools SD building. I never said that your school or methods lacked other vehicles to develop SD.

Quote:Our one-steps are just as effective as yours and are only a very small part in the grand scheme of things.

They are different & yes only a part. However I still don't understand the purpose.

Quote:No encyclopedia is going to answer all of the questions. I won't judge your training and make comments without actually standing there and learning in your shoes, I would expect the same from you and any others. I've said my peace.

The point about the Encylopedia is often mistaken. I never said it had all the answers, because it does not. Rather it is a textbook that is required in most learning settings. Can you think of a class that you ever took that did not have a corresponding textbook? And didn't having text help your learning. I was not trying to judge. I was just trying to learn the how & why you did something & then offer ideas on how we do it, so you could contrast & compare, so you could use the info how you see fit. Sharing info is what I like to do. I thank this forum for allowing the opportunity.

Quote: Are you narrow minded enough not to see their usefulness; much better then "any" pattern which I find to be a waste as there is no resistance.

This was why I did not want to include this in the discussion. But to avoid you thinking i was ignoring your question regarding patterns i addressed it seperately, along with the statement concerning the possible confusion. Patterns to me have little to do with SD.

I love the discussion you two are having, I think all persons observing will come away with some insight as to how our different organizations are more alike than many want to concede (sparing rules and competitions aside) If we could only get the governing bodies to vent like this more! These are great competitive opinions/observations.

I'm not sure I know how to respond all to this, as what I try to explain is not getting through and nor is open mindedness. I obviously cannot explain things to give them justice enough for you to understand.

We obviously disagree ITF on when free sparring should happen. At white belt the first things taught are three-step sparring followed by no contact full room sparring; at yellow belt full contact sparring is introduced. Classes will start with kicking your partner with various techniques so that you understand kicking a person and also being kicked. Nobody tries to kill anybody at that level though I find the lower belts so energized that they are trying to kill you ... I did the same at that level. Also at our white belt levels and up ground work is introduced and there is free grappling after class. Again nobody takes advantage of the other but again the lower levels will try to power through everything trying to win.

Just like your one-steps being pre-arranged so are ours. WE UNDERSTAND that there is no possible way that somebody is going to stand there to take all of those defenses however it will give the user (defender) many ideas of what can be done. I can honestly say that they work as when competing in no gi grappling tournaments and due to this training, I was able to incorporate many techniques that came naturally. And again they are not the only things we work on for self defense and do have prearranged techniques that are one strike only to vital areas. We also have other patterns such as our E-Day punching and kicking as well as patterns of working around the body to vital areas ... again understanding that you could never pull all of them off but you may get one or more. The main thing is "open mindedness" and visualizing as the more you do these things the easier they will be remember. In fact many of the wrist locks and joint manipulation taught has come in useful when grappling. If you can do any of those techniques standing up they can be done on the ground and you need to realize this and visualize that they are one and the same.

A lot more is done with self defense within class that includes sparring and not just TKD sparring. Sparring that includes stand-up to take down to submission and to ground'n pound. Learning that you have more then just your hands and feet but also knees and elbows, forearms, fingers, etc. Then at black belt things take off and 26 self defense techniques are used to for quick and vital strikes. Second Dan there are even more to learn and so on.

The one-steps we do are an excellent tool. Timing and distance are crucial. Falling skills are a must and this puts them to the test as you will be swept, tripped and yanked to the ground. Both must be prepared to be hit and hit hard; not devastating hard but hard; contact is a must especially at higher ranks. Learning that there is no such thing as blocking, they are strikes and make them count. Knowing where to strike in certain areas such as on the arm as if you strike closer to the elbow or strike to high on the arm that you will not have the desired effect. Also when striking to not over strike thus opening yourself up. Also when attacking to not lean over thus putting your head in a vital position to be hit. It teaches commitment. Your taught not to be stiff but agile especially if your are going to the ground as stiff will hurt more and you may not recover. Also understanding that it takes more then "one blow" to stop an assailant and to keep going until they are no longer a threat and you can get away. That you must commit to the attack and continue it with whatever you can and why multiple techniques are shown to give you an "idea" of what could be done. The higher your understanding the more mix and matching you can do. If somebody grabs my collars I can pull them in close enough for me to go hip to hip and toss them to the ground and while still holding that arm I can break the elbow across my knee, stomp them to the face or punch them or kick them repeatedly. Or I could have used a technique to lock up their hand and break their arm while taking them to the ground.

These are all just tools to keep you thinking and give you options. Add these to other techniques taught then your scope of understanding become even more clearer. They are tools, one of many.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

Lets start with using only 1 aspect per post. Let me make it clear that I think it sounds like you train at a tough school that looks to make contact in order to have a level of realism. That I think is a good thing. I am also not saying your school does not do a good job in teaching effective SD. It certainly sounds like you guys address this, make it a priority & have the good results you expect.

SPARRINGOur sparring (& SD) is taught from day 1. It is just introduced & taught at different levels. I make no claim that any way is either better or inferior than another. What is important is that there is a logical sequence that builds someone skills in a manner most efficent to developing the goal.

The way we do it is to beak it down into 3 categories. They are pre-arranged sparring, which is further broken down to 3 categories, 3, 2 & 1 step sparring. This is followed by semi-free sparring & then finally free sparring. HooSinSul follows this, but is not called sparring. Both sparring & HooSinSul can aide a student with SD. For BBs we add model sparring, foot technique sparring & pre-arranged free sparring. We do it this way, because the founder insisted that one be well schooled in the basics, before being let loose to do it freely. Each of our types of sparring have purposes. That was what I was trying to get you to tell me. The stated purposes of your approach. He felt & I agree, that if one is let free before they have developed enough techniques & can use them effectivley, they will rely upon the few basic ones they are taught as a beginner. I see the advantage of this program. I also see what some consider as a disavantage, namely that we wait too long for the freedom to be granted. My only response is that we are developing BBs, not color belt students. We can afford to do this, as we are not a big commercial school. I have always been personally very pleased with the results. IMHO most ITF schools do not adhere as strictly to this as they have to pay the bills. That is not, nor ever was my focus. I think it is sound, as most other learning activities do something similiar, with respect to a logical progression.

It seems that your approach is different. What is more important though, is it also appears that you follow a systemized approach to help the development of the student.

WE UNDERSTAND that there is no possible way that somebody is going to stand there to take all of those defenses however it will give the user (defender) many ideas of what can be done. I can honestly say that they work as when competing in no gi grappling tournaments and due to this training, I was able to incorporate many techniques that came naturally. And again they are not the only things we work on for self defense and do have prearranged techniques that are one strike only to vital areas.

The one-steps we do are an excellent tool. Also understanding that it takes more then "one blow" to stop an assailant and to keep going until they are no longer a threat and you can get away. That you must commit to the attack and continue it with whatever you can and why multiple techniques are shown to give you an "idea" of what could be done. The higher your understanding the more mix and matching you can do.

First, our 1 steps are not pre-arranged. The defender attacks with 1 technique, using all available tools & both left & right sides.

Okay it looks like the 1 steps you do are more like a combo building drill. If the attacker is limited to one attack & then must pose or become compliant, then it appears they are giving the defender a model upon which to practice combos. There is certainly nothing wrong with that, as it can help one build combos that they may like to use.

My only suggestion is that you consider the fact that if the attacker can only do 1 attack & the defender can do combos, then from the standoint of trying to mimick reality, it is less realistic. I would describe that from our syllabus as the attacker is doing 1 steps while the defender is doing free sparring. Not fair, but a good SD combo building skill. We do that in fundamental movements & semi-free sparring.

We may be arguing more semantics. But please understand that our step sparring is strictly limited to 1 counter attack. The underlying reason is that an attacker will not stand there for you to do combos. In fact, the actual reactions of the attacker will naturally effect the ability of the defender to perform the counter combos.

I think you are mistaken that the attacker is there just "posing". He is trying to hit the other student it is just that the other student is "reacting" and within seconds has done the required techniques; both side are done. I'll agree that at lower belt levels it looks slower as they try to figure out the techniques however that is only a learning curve.

I think you are wrong in that only one technique could be pulled off. It is taught if you are defending that you turn the tables and become the attacker thus putting them on the defense. With commitment you drive forward and attack relentlessly thus taking them off their guard. It is very easy to get off one or more techniques and I think that it may be beneficial for you and others to take this approach otherwise those who don't continue the attack may from muscle memory only stop at one technique and then put themselves still in harms way. You say the attacker will not stand there for you to do combos but I say I'm not giving him that choice; he took it upon himself to attack me well now he is the defender and I am going to be relentless that will involve fists, elbows, knees, legs and any other means to break his will and break him. My goal is to ensure he is down and is immobile; no longer a threat. If an ambulance has to come and take his sorry ass away then I'm good with that.

Again this is only a small training tool that I enjoy and find very useful. It cannot replace actual self defense tools that involve both individuals providing resistance but is a good basis.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

Okay thank you for your reply. I think I am making headway to having you fully grasp my point. Please bear with me. It is difficult to convey complex issues that involve action in an action-less forum like this. Kindly allow me to continue by reading below & then responding after you have tried my suggestions. Thanks in advance!

Quote:I think you are mistaken that the attacker is there just "posing". He is trying to hit the other student it is just that the other student is "reacting" and within seconds has done the required techniques;

I know you have stated they actually try to hit their partner. That is commendable & the way it should be. But if they are THEN AFTER the attack, not permitted to do anything else, but pose, they are not an opponent by definition, but a partner who is NOW acting as a model. I also have stated this can be a good drill for developing combos which you seem to agree with. Now, thats fine & I have no problem with any of it so far, especially when we both know & have stated that there remain additional training regiments in your school that appear to be in place to supplement that & build strength to correct any inherent weaknesses naturally caused by no longer having a live opponent.

Now simply try this. After the intitial strike that is trying to be landed by the attacker, have the attacker be free to do whatever they wish. I am sure you will or should find that the dynamics change & that this will effect the ability & how the combos by the defender are deployed. Please let me know how this goes.

Quote:I think you are wrong in that only one technique could be pulled off. It is taught if you are defending that you turn the tables and become the attacker thus putting them on the defense. With commitment you drive forward and attack relentlessly thus taking them off their guard. It is very easy to get off one or more techniques and I think that it may be beneficial for you and others to take this approach otherwise those who don't continue the attack may from muscle memory only stop at one technique and then put themselves still in harms way. You say the attacker will not stand there for you to do combos but I say I'm not giving him that choice; he took it upon himself to attack me well now he is the defender and I am going to be relentless that will involve fists, elbows, knees, legs and any other means to break his will and break him. My goal is to ensure he is down and is immobile; no longer a threat. If an ambulance has to come and take his sorry ass away then I'm good with that.

Yes I follow you, but still wish for you to try what I suggest.

[quote}Again this is only a small training tool that I enjoy and find very useful. It cannot replace actual self defense tools that involve both individuals providing resistance but is a good basis.

Agreed that it can be a good tool. Just different from what I am trying to share with you.

You have to understand ITF that this is set curriculum and nothing is going to change especially when this is a good training tool. What you are suggesting however is covered in free sparring and I'm not talking about TKD free sparring. I'm talking about two resisting opponents trying to defend and attack each other; from standing to ground to submission.

One of the drills we do is similar to what you are suggesting. There is a set number of techniques given to the attacker and defender and first it is done slow and with little contact. The next time both are increased and finally full out contact and resistance. This is similar to our drills such as boxer vs. grappler. Boxer is only allowed to use boxing techniques and wears 8 ounce boxing gloves. The grappler can only use grappling techniques so cannot strike or kick. Drills like these make you aware of what is missing in the fight game but also how to work on certain techniques to your advantage.

Again, our one-steps are a standardized training method and will not be changed however I can guarantee you that resistance and free flowing drills are more then covered in our curriculum and I would even be confident to say probably more then most. Think of it this way, in every system when training you always must allow your training partner ample opportunity to train various techniques so that they can understand them. If you put up full resistance all of the time then they will never get the technique off and will never understand it. For instance when we have our throwing days; you allow yourself to be thrown from both sides and then you change up so you are throwing. Later in class, usually towards the end, there is free sparring where you try to use those same techniques taught however now you are both resisting. Learn the application with no resistance, add slight resistance and then full resistance; that is the best training method available.

I also want you to understand that in one-step sparring it only takes a few seconds to do a few techniques; you make it sound like it is longer then that. To strike a punch coming in, grab his wrist and then stepping in to deliver a elbow strike to the head probably only takes a second. To strike a oncoming punch, step in and sweep their legs; and as they fall rotate their arm so that when the hit the ground their elbow is against your knee for a break and then finish with a punch to the face, a couple of seconds only. A couple of seconds "is" realistic enough especially when the attacker is not trained and is not expecting a resisting and more skilled opponent. Again I think if you stop at one technique you are selling yourself short and are ingraining a bad habit because "rarely" is one technique sufficient enough to stop an assailant; the one hit rule is more then not false and no matter how much you train you cannot rely on luck.

_________________________"IF I COME ... I'M BRINGING THE PAIN WITH ME"

Quote:You have to understand ITF that this is set curriculum and nothing is going to change especially when this is a good training tool. What you are suggesting however is covered in free sparring.......

I respectfully can tell you that I am not trying to get you to change anything. I am merely trying to get you to open your mind & simply try 1 aspect, thats all. You keep replying with very sound arguements on how your training fills in any potential gaps. You are missing my point & I am sorry I have not been able to get it across better.

[quote\Again, our one-steps are a standardized training method and will not be changed however I can guarantee you that resistance and free flowing drills are more then covered in our curriculum and I would even be confident to say probably more then most.

I realize this & this is clouding the single narrow issue that I am trying to get you to see. I am sorry that I am failing with my communication attempts.

Quote:Think of it this way, in every system when training you always must allow your training partner ample opportunity to train various techniques so that they can understand them.

yes & this is a good combo skill building drill, but lets get away from the semantics as it is confusing the issue

Quote:I also want you to understand that in one-step sparring it only takes a few seconds to do a few techniques; you make it sound like it is longer then that. To strike a punch coming in, grab his wrist and then stepping in to deliver a elbow strike to the head probably only takes a second. To strike a oncoming punch, step in and sweep their legs; and as they fall rotate their arm so that when the hit the ground their elbow is against your knee for a break and then finish with a punch to the face, a couple of seconds only. A couple of seconds "is" realistic enough especially when the attacker is not trained and is not expecting a resisting and more skilled opponent. Again I think if you stop at one technique you are selling yourself short and are ingraining a bad habit because "rarely" is one technique sufficient enough to stop an assailant; the one hit rule is more then not false and no matter how much you train you cannot rely on luck.

This goes to the heart of my point. Please understand that I am not trying to get you to change your mind or change anything. My point is merely that if you will just try what I have suggested you may see my point. Please try if you feel so inclined. But kindly keep the debate strictly limited to what you & I describe as 1 steps, because once we bring in other training mechanisms, it just confuses the point. That point of course is the difference between a live opponent & complining partner in JUST THIS area. Maybe someone else can help clarify. Thanks